The book To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee is often associated with a various number of themes such as racism, social inequality, the importance of family values, and much more. But one of the more hidden messages of the book centers around the idea that there is a coexistence of good and evil. This theme is really brought to life the more the reader is able to understand the book. Through sub themes such as coming of age, perspective, and intense characterization of many important characters the idea of good and evil is really brought to light.
The Story, The Possibility of Evil is a truly interesting story that demonstrates the evil of a community that seems almost perfect. This story demonstrates how there is probably no place on Earth that evil has not reached. The story bases itself on a small suburban town and the people that live there. The reader meets Miss Strangeworth who is a sweet little lady that smiles to everyone during the day and starts conversations, but by the time she gets home she starts writing letters revealing secrets and unpleasant facts of her neighbours and fellow townspeople and
One of the oldest dilemmas in philosophy is also one of the greatest threats to Christian theology. The problem of evil simultaneously perplexes the world’s greatest minds and yet remains palpably close to the hearts of the most common people. If God is good, then why is there evil? The following essay describes the problem of evil in relation to God, examines Christian responses to the problem, and concludes the existence of God and the existence of evil are fully compatible.
The core belief of the two religions is ‘Karma’, which means ‘action’. Buddhism and Hinduism both originated in India, therefore, some of its core beliefs are similar, however, the way the two religions perceive their core beliefs are different. In Hinduism, Karma could be defined as a process of cause and effect. The actions of people have an effect on them somewhere in their life (Tambyah). According to this concept, the good deeds of a person will take him to a good future or vice versa. Karma has also a strong link with the moral actions and intentions of a person. In this regard, if a person does well with a wrong intention, he or she will definitely get wrong effects in the future due to their bad intentions. On the other hand, Karma in Buddhism is commonly known as a‘virtue’. Similar to
The argument for the existence of God has been a debate for many centuries. God, in terms of philosophy, must be a supernatural being that: is all-knowing, is all-powerful, and is all-good. Theists believe God exists based on these terms; atheists on the other hand don’t believe in God. Atheists believe that if there is evil present in the universe, then there is no possible way God can exist if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Evil is defined in three different categories: human evil (evil we humans cause), natural evil (not in our control, of the Earth), and sufferings of the heart (not necessarily human/natural evil). The argument for the problem of evil is that God doesn’t exist because evil exists. In
In this paper, I will break apart J. L. Mackie’s stern defense of the logical problem of evil, which he uses to suggest the God does not exist. I will attempt to defend the notion that both God and evil, in the form of human creation, can exist in the world by way of suggesting that freewill is the answer. Furthermore, I will strengthen the argument for freewill against Mackie’s defense, which suggests that the argument of freewill also compromises the Omni-three nature of God. In part, I will back freewill by using Mackie’s own logic against him. In its totality, I will build up a strong force against the logical problem of evil, leaving room for both the existence of human formed evil and God in this world under the
The problem of evil as suffering is a problem of what to do with the obstacle for the believer but also an obstacle to unbeliever to converge because they do not think it harmonising. In contradiction to compatibility, an atheist often suggested that the present of evil entails the absence of God. Atheist argued, if God exists, then as an omnipotent, he is able to prevent the evil occurrence. For omniscient, it implies under any circumstances evil will occur if he does not act. Then, being perfectly good, he will prevent its occurrence and so evil will not exist. Based on this above proclamation, the existence of God does not compatible with the evil of whatever kind. However, theists response to this logical problem of evil by an atheist is that necessarily perfectly good being, foreseeing the occurrence of evil and able to prevent it, will prevent evil. The essay will first, define what evil is according to Swinburne as one of the philosopher of religion, Second, Swinburne four categories of evil will be discussed (Physical evil, mental evil, state evil, moral evil). Third, Phillip logical and existential problem evil will be discussed through. How will all these above assertions be a problem to those that and does not believe in God.
If we are living in a world that was created by a perfect being, why are there imperfect aspects? If this ultimate being or creator (I will say God for purpose of this paper) is fundamentally good and moral, and is even unable to create evil, then how did evil come to be in the life we are living? According to the problem of evil, if there is a God, there is no evil. But because there is evil in the world, the conclusion can be drawn that there is no God (Sober). At first glance, this argument is perfectly logical. However, this claim may be reversed. For if one is indicating that there is evil in this world, they are believing that there has been a “line” drawn somewhere to separate the good and the bad. This “line” is known by many, if I dare say all, yet nobody actually determined what was considered bad. The reversal of the problem of evil can lead to the argument of God and evil both existing in the same world. But, it seems as though if there were a perfect God, there would be no evil in the world, as He would not be able to create it or He would be moral enough to see it happening and stop it. Can we really live in a world that contains evil, which was created by a perfect God that is not capable of creating evil/capable of stopping it? This question may even lead into the following question, assuming that God and evil do exist together: if there is a God, why is there (allowed) evil in the world? However, before we are even able to begin to understand why there is
Ten children are killed every day in the United States by guns; people are murdered senselessly; Columbine High School; Over one-third of middle school children in Cascade County have used illegal drugs and over one-half have tried alcohol; innocent people in foreign countries are being wiped out (Kosovo); The Holocaust; Hiroshima; Vietnam; poverty, starvation and oppression in third world countries; Capitalism; environmental decay and neglect; the media; Oklahoma City; the uni-bomber; earthquakes, fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes, airplane crashes; domestic/child abuse; disease, birth defects and mental disorders. Why?Why?Why?… The question never changes and is asked over and over and over and
Buddhism and Jainism both believe in the concept of karma as the force responsible for all of the suffering in existence. Both also acknowledge the absoluteness of karma and its unavoidable effect on the beings who are subject to the cycle of birth and death. But they differ in the concept of the nature of karma and how it impacts the various beings. According to the beliefs held by Jainism, karma is not only a result of a being’s actions, but a real substance that becomes attached to each jiva, or self, while it takes part in many actions throughout the course of its existence. This karma, which is made up of tiny particles, binds to the being until it is cleansed through the observation of the morals and practices of the Jain religion, including pure conduct and severe austerities. There are two types of karma within Jainism, one that is known as “harming” karmas and there is “non-harming” karmas. The karmas can be fully liberated through moksha alone. In Buddhism, as in Hinduism, karma is a consequence of one’s
In Buddhism, Karma has two forms; mental karma and deed karma (Encyclopedia of Religion 266). The two forms both abide by the belief that good or bad actions yield good or bad results. Mental karma is governed by what a person thinks. If a person thinks impure or malicious thoughts, they will build up bad karma during his life, and for pure thoughts, good karma is built up. Deed karma refers to the actions performed physically by a person. As with mental karma, deed karma is the culmination of good karma and bad karma resulting from one’s actions.
The Buddhist doctrine of karma ("deeds", "actions"), and the closely related doctrine of rebirth, are perhaps the best known, and often the least understood, of Buddhist doctrines. The matter is complicated by the fact that the other Indian religious traditions of Hinduism and Jainism have their own theories of Karma and Reincarnation. It is in fact the Hindu versions that are better known in the West. The Buddhist theory of karma and rebirth are quite distinct from their other Indian counterparts.
In Buddhism, karma is cause and effect, or reaction and action. By thinking, speaking and acting wisely (so as to reduce suffering) we cause effects that produce happiness; by thinking, speaking and acting unwisely (so as to produce suffering) we cause effects that produce
Notions of good and evil appear in every social sphere of influence and each serve an influential role in how humanity interacts within itself. Shakespearean works often rely on a wrongful act being corrected, a specific moral dilemma that often revolves around themes of death. Shakespeare’s tragedy ‘Hamlet’, akin to Macbeth in tragic scope, explores the idea of morality as well as how it impacts the lives of each character, but is Hamlet a play about the conflict between good and evil? Hamlet delves into the notions good and evil by focusing on the spheres of politics, personal relationships and religion. Claudius’ rise to power in Denmark, as well as how he chose to use his power and the end of his rule are depictions of political and